Quote:



naaaaa.. just passing on a bit of domestic experience learned while owning a boat

I worked graveyard last night and the next few days as well so I am off to get some rest.

ltr

Quote:

Yeah sure, it's always the same. Each time someone's ranting, and people come to try to explain, we have to kill the discussion.
Maybe we should put a sticky topic in the forum, stating that free rating is tolerated, and objective discussion is not.

Daube, the reason I suggested we let the thread go is that the conversation was going nowhere.  JoeD is fine to come in here and say whatever he wants, as are you and I.  The point is, other than saying we agree that FSX has some issues and hoping theyll get fixed, how was complaining about MS going to fix anything.  Many of us asked for examples of what was wrong and tried to offer solutions, but it didnt seem to help.  I want Ms to make a better sim, but realize its not perfect, and liek the past two versions, will take alot of work from freeware designers to help make adjustments.  Is it right?  Maybe, maybe not, depending on what your viewpoint is.  In the end, complaining ABOUT MS isnt going to make the sim better.  However, complaing TO MS may.  Todd

Or.. maybe try this reality, Joe...

If you can't stand seeing people enjoy a channel; tune it out yourself. Or at least resist the urge to take over the programming. Join the dialogue instead of stomping your feet and pointing fingers.

Go back to page one of this thread. It started out with an honest question and an opinion.. It  COULD have been an exchange if ideas..  ala ...  "I like this that and the other thing, because of X,Y,Z"...  "I think this is a problem because of X,Y,Z" ..  "yeah I see your point, but" ... "I'd like this to be addressed and hope it is" ..  "I think you should try this" ...

That's the direction it was headed...


Your very first post was rude, personal  and condescending..  A negative assault, not only on a company (whose product by the way, is not being shoved down your throat), but ANYONE who runs, enjoys and appreciates FSX. No open exchange.. just your personal condemnation; that you're not only NOT qualified to make.. you weren't even good at faking.

Quote:



Its simple math

Its not a game, its a SIMULATOR  


FS9 now gives the budget user the pleasure to enjoy an earth bound flight sim to its full ability. If it did that in 2003, you would not have the interest in it you do today because hardware innovation brings out new levels of discovery and user experience. If the developers left the level of visual sim ability @ 2003 hardware levels... the complaints would be piled a MILE higher for better graphics. AND you guys KNOW that.

There is also something to be said from a business standpoint for getting board and stop using the product.

FSX is designed for DX10 and VISTA. The readme that comes with it states that QUITE clearly. There is no hardware on the market that has the ability to rip through FSX and I for one am GLAD because that means developers will have the window of time needed to bring FSX to life in all its glory.

Those screenshots I posted are really crap. Wait another year. If FSX was designed for today’s hardware, what I and other sources have posted would be the limit of what you would ever get to experience.


Is that what you guys want?

Not me...

I'm not stuck in 2003. I prefer to grow with the times. If I want to expereince new things, I have to budget and plan for them. No different than budgeting and planning a nice vacation where I throw my money completely down the drain and get no hardware to keep in return.

If the mindset is... 'I buy this now and I can use it for 2-5 years'... get over it, because computer hardware has not been that way since the 1980's and its absolutely no surprise your brand new hardware will most likely be outdated within 6-12 months.

You buy the motherboard and supporting devices to expand for as long as possible but you better get use to a video card purchase once a year if you want to keep up with the sim and the industry.

otherwise, good luck.. and its NOT Microsofts or any other software makers fault

On to better things..

Quote:


Ah I see someone is studying up on why a business is a business. 

Guys, guys! Hold your horses there. I understand that Joe may have said some things in the past few pages that have offended you, but that's no excuse to continue this petty debate especially when Joe is just beginning to understand that these petty debates are useless and fail to resolve anything except who's better at winning an arguement.

[To Brett]

I don't think Joe has offended anybody with his first post in this thread. After carefully reading the first post through, I have determined that he is just simply stating the obvious. He is right when he says that there are flaws in FSX. In fact, I have just noticed a flaw myself when I tried FSX. Sometimes, the scenery would freeze up or stay put in the monitor like an image burnt into one's mind, while the buildings pass by and the aircraft moves along. It kind of resembles suspended animation. That's one flaw I found. Chances are it's hardware related as my dad's laptop [which has a better processor than mine's] doesn't seem to suffer such problems.

Joe was also right when he said that FS is expected to work like any other normal game or sim right out of the box.

[To Nick N]

Nick, I think it's time for you to settle down as well and take a deep breath. Having 8 pages worth of arguements can make anyone exhausted. Maybe Fozzer's finest meals can help lower your blood preasure.

[To Joe]

I'm starting to see that you have calmed down already judging from your last two posts. I hope everyone else, whether they're fans of FS or not, does the same. And let's keep it that way. This thread was not intended for arguements judging by Francsal's initial post.

[To Franscal]

Sorry if your thread has derailed a couple of times, these kind of threads have a habit of starting heated and pointless debates [exactly like politics]. So let me restart this thread by stating the following:

Sometimes it can be quite difficult for one to see differences in the screenshots unless they know what to look for. I for one look at the water. FS9 and FSX have completely different water effects. Another thing I look for is self shadowing. FSX is the first version to finally exploit self shadowing. Another feature that indicates that a shot is FSX based is when space is used as a background of the shot. But even this feature can be confused for Orbiter. Try flying over the planet earth in orbiter at a certain altittude, then do the same in FSX at the same altittude. You'll notice very little differences except for the terrain textures and the water.

But there are certain things that can't be shown in a still image like a screenshot. The animations that are now affected by the inverse kenetics of skin and bones are not visible in much the same way as motion is. Then there's the flight dynamics. There is absolutely no way anyone can depicts the dynamics through a screenshots. Videos help, but the only sure way for anyone to know is when they try it themselves. For me, I have noticed that the stall characteristics in FSX have improved as I pushed my Mooney Bravo to the limit. Another thing is the water dynamics [not the effects]. The water no longer anchors a floating plane, therefore the plane can float slowly even with 1/3-1/2 power. Has anyone noticed that you no longer bounce off the runways during takeoff in much the same way as FS9 did?

There, I hope this post helps.